"lawful authority" simply means authority that is adhering to whatever legal cover has been given that authority by the government.
That legal cover could well trample my liberty and freedom.
If the police tell me I can't jump off a cliff because I might hurt myself, they are exercising "legal authority", and they are infringing on my God-given freedom and liberty.
But that type of nanny-state law is what Rudy Giuliani supports, and he thinks that my freedom should be based on whatever rules he thinks are appropriate for me, like not being allowed to own a handgun, or a ferret.
Freedom is the right to make the wrong choices.
It very well could. And it often does.
It is why we have a Constitution and the Courts to define the limits of that "lawful" authority.
But the point remains, that an intelligent and learned person, engaging in a political science discussion on Government would very legitimately argue Giuliani's point.
Because in the absence of lawful authority what remains is barbarism not freedom. See Iraq. See Gaza.
Giuliani is right.
And obviosuly not the candidate for those who like politicans simple.
"I'm for Freedom" Rah-Rah! Sis-Boom-Ba
"But that type of nanny-state law is what Rudy Giuliani supports, and he thinks that my freedom should be based on whatever rules he thinks are appropriate for me, like not being allowed to own a handgun, or a ferret.
Freedom is the right to make the wrong choices."
Excellent.
Choices carry consequences, and lawful authority is what we have all granted the various levels of government, and the agreed upon standard that we have all set in place, to make sure that you face the consequences of your wrong choices, or are absolved of them.
Anything less than that is anarchy, and loss of freedom ensues.